The separation of powers is a model for the governance of a state. Under this model, a state's government is divided into branches, each with separate and independent powers and areas of responsibility so that the powers of one branch are not in conflict with the powers associated with the other branches. The typical division is into three branches: a legislature, an executive, and a judiciary, which is the trias politica model. It can be contrasted with the fusion of powers in some parliamentary systems where the executive and legislative branches overlap.

Separation of powers, therefore, refers to the division of responsibilities into distinct branches to limit any one branch from exercising the core functions of another. The intent of separation of powers is to prevent the concentration of unchecked power and to provide for checks and balances to avoid autocracy or inefficiencies.

The separation of powers model is often imprecisely and metonymically used interchangeably with the trias politica principle. While the trias politica is a common type of this form, it is not its only type.

John Calvin (1509–1564) favoured a system of government that divided political power between democracy and aristocracy (mixed government). Calvin appreciated the advantages of democracy, stating: "It is an invaluable gift if God allows a people to elect its own government and magistrates."[1] In order to reduce the danger of misuse of political power, Calvin suggested setting up several political institutions which should complement and control each other in a system of checks and balances.[2]

In every government there are three sorts of power: the legislative; the executive in respect to things dependent on the law of nations; and the executive in regard to matters that depend on the civil law.

By virtue of the first, the prince or magistrate enacts temporary or perpetual laws, and amends or abrogates those that have been already enacted. By the second, he makes peace or war, sends or receives embassies, establishes the public security, and provides against invasions. By the third, he punishes criminals, or determines the disputes that arise between individuals. The latter we shall call the judiciary power, and the other, simply, the executive power of the state.

Montesquieu argues that each Power should only exercise its own functions, it was quite explicit here:

When the legislative and executive powers are united in the same person, or in the same body of magistrates, there can be no liberty; because apprehensions may arise, lest the same monarch or senate should enact tyrannical laws, to execute them in a tyrannical manner.

Again, there is no liberty if the judiciary power be not separated from the legislative and executive. Were it joined with the legislative, the life and liberty of the subject would be exposed to arbitrary control; for the judge would be then the legislator. Were it joined to the executive power, the judge might behave with violence and oppression.

There would be an end of every thing, were the same man, or the same body, whether of the nobles or of the people, to exercise those three powers, that of enacting laws, that of executing the public resolutions, and of trying the causes of individuals.

Separation of powers requires a different source of legitimization, or a different act of legitimization from the same source, for each of the separate powers. If the legislative branch appoints the executive and judicial powers, as Montesquieu indicated, there will be no separation or division of its powers, since the power to appoint carries with it the power to revoke.

The executive power ought to be in the hands of a monarch, because this branch of government, having need of dispatch, is better administered by one than by many: on the other hand, whatever depends on the legislative power, is oftentimes better regulated by many than by a single person.

But, if there were no monarch, and the executive power should be committed to a certain number of persons, selected from the legislative body, there would be an end of liberty, by reason the two powers would be united; as the same persons would sometimes possess, and would be always able to possess, a share in both.

Montesquieu did actually specify that the independence of the judiciary has to be real, and not merely apparent.[13] The judiciary was generally seen as the most important of the three powers, independent and unchecked,[14] while also likely to claim to be the least dangerous one.[13]

Checks and balances is the principle that each of the Branches has the power to limit or check the other two and this creates a balance between the three separate powers of the state, this principle induces that the ambitions of one branch prevent that one of the other branches become supreme, and thus be eternally confronting each other and in that process leaving the people free from government abuses. Checks and Balances are designed to maintain the system of separation of powers keeping each branch in its place. This is based on the idea that it is not enough to separate the powers and guarantee their independence but to give the various branches the constitutional means to defend their own legitimate powers from the encroachments of the other branches.[15] They guarantee that the powers of the State have the same weight (co-equal), that is, to be balanced, so that they can limit each other, avoiding the abuse of state power. the origin of checks and balances, like separation of powers itself, is specifically credited to Montesquieu in the Enlightenment (in The Spirit of the Laws, 1748), under this influence was implemented in 1787 in the Constitution of the United States.

«But the great security against a gradual concentration of the several powers in the same department, consists in giving to those who administer each department the necessary constitutional means and personal motives to resist encroachments of the others. The provision for defense must in this, as in all other cases, be made commensurate to the danger of attack. Ambition must be made to counteract ambition. The interest of the man must be connected with the constitutional rights of the place. It may be a reflection on human nature, that such devices should be necessary to control the abuses of government. But what is government itself, but the greatest of all reflections on human nature? If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary. In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself.»

«A dependence on the people is, no doubt, the primary control on the government; but experience has taught mankind the necessity of auxiliary precautions. This policy of supplying, by opposite and rival interests, the defect of better motives, might be traced through the whole system of human affairs, private as well as public. We see it particularly displayed in all the subordinate distributions of power, where the constant aim is to divide and arrange the several offices in such a manner as that each may be a check on the other that the private interest of every individual may be a sentinel over the public rights. These inventions of prudence cannot be less requisite in the distribution of the supreme powers of the State.»

Determines how a law acts to compel testimony and the production of evidence

Determines how laws should be interpreted to assure uniform policies in a top-down fashion via the appeals process, but gives discretion in individual cases to low-level judges. The amount of discretion depends upon the standard of review, determined by the type of case in question.

Countries with little separation of power include New Zealand and Canada. Canada makes limited use of separation of powers in practice, although in theory it distinguishes between branches of government.

New Zealand's constitution is based on the principle of separation of powers through a series of constitutional safeguards, many of which are tacit. The Executive's ability to carry out decisions often depends on the Legislature, which is elected under the mixed member proportional system. This means the government is rarely a single party but a coalition of parties. The Judiciary is also free of government interference. If a series of judicial decisions result in an interpretation of the law which the Executive considers does not reflect the intention of the policy, the Executive can initiate changes to the legislation in question through the Legislature. The Executive cannot direct or request a judicial officer to revise or reconsider a decision; decisions are final. Should there be a dispute between the Executive and Judiciary, the Executive has no authority to direct the Judiciary, or its individual members and vice versa.

Complete separation of powers systems are almost always presidential, although theoretically this need not be the case. There are a few historical exceptions, such as the Directoire system of revolutionary France. Switzerland offers an example of non-Presidential separation of powers today: It is run by a seven-member executive branch, the Federal Council. However, some might argue[weasel words] that Switzerland does not have a strong separation of powers system, as the Federal Council is appointed by parliament (but not dependent on parliament) and although the judiciary has no power of review, the judiciary is still separate from the other branches.

Australia does not maintain a strict separation between the legislative and executive branches of government—indeed, government ministers are required to be members of parliament—but the federal judiciary strictly guards its independence from the other two branches. However, under influence from the American constitution, the Australian constitution does define the three branches of government separately, and this has been interpreted by the judiciary to induce an implicit separation of powers.[19] State governments have a similar level of separation of power, but this is generally on the basis of convention, rather than constitution.

Hans Kelsen was the principal author of the tripartite Constitution of Austria.

The Constitution of Austria was originally written by Hans Kelsen, the prominent constitutional scholar in Europe at that time. Kelsen was to serve as a part of the judicial court of review for Austria as part of its tripartite government.

Executive. This includes the popularly elected president as well as the prime minister and cabinet. The French Prime minister is nominated by the president, but the government is responsible to the lower house of the legislature, the National Assembly.

Legislature. A bicameral legislature that includes the Senate (upper house) and the National Assembly (lower house). The relationship between the two houses is asymmetric, meaning that in case of dispute, the National Assembly has the final word according to Article 45[23] of the Constitution.

Judiciary (Court of Final Appeal and other courts and tribunals) – judiciary

The Chief Executive, elected by a 1200-member Election Committee which historically was dominated by pro-Beijing establishment members, is both head of the region and head of government, and chairs the Executive Council which is composed of "unofficial" members and government secretaries.

The legislature consists of 70 members, 35 of whom are elected by "functional" constituencies represented by members within various industries rather than the public at large.[24] Separation of power between executive and legislature is, therefore, questionable.[25]

The courts frequently exercise a power of judicial review of administrative actions and also decide matters of constitutionality of legislation, though this power is circumscribed under the power of the People's Republic of China's National People's Congress to make final determinations as to interpretation.[26] Hence, the separation of powers is again structurally weak.

It is worth noting that the branches' separation of power may not be intended within the Hong Kong Basic Law as leaders of the PRC have publicly called for the three branches to cooperate and be led by the Chief Executive.[27]

Further, Deng Xiaoping was quoted to have categorically dismissed Hong Kong having a "Trias Politica" system.[28]

India follows constitutional democracy which offers a clear separation of powers. The judiciary branch is fairly independent of the other two branches with the power to interpret the constitution. Parliament has the legislative powers. Executive powers are vested with the President who is advised by the Union Council of Ministers headed by the Prime Minister. The constitution of India vested the duty of protecting, preserving and defending the constitution with the President as common head of the executive, parliament, armed forces, etc. not only for the union government but also the various state governments in a federal structure. All three branches have "checks and balances" over each other to maintain the balance of power and not to exceed the constitutional limits.[29]

President can be impeached after conducting a fair trial by the parliament for his unconstitutional orders/decisions.

President can be asked to step down by the judiciary for his unconstitutional orders/decisions on the grounds of losing eligibility criteria of the president.

Parliament can impeach judges of Supreme Court and High Courts of states for their incompetence and mala fides. Higher bench of judges can set aside the incorrect judgements of smaller bench of judges to uphold the constitution.

In Italy the powers are separated, even though the Council of Ministers needs a vote of confidence from both chambers of Parliament, that represents a large number of members (almost 1,000).[30]

Like every parliamentary form of government, there is no real separation between Legislature and Executive, rather a continuum between them due to the confidence link. By the way, the balance is protected by Constitution also between these two branches.[31] and, obviously, between them and the judiciary branch, which is really independent.

A note on the status of separation of power, checks and balances, and balance of power in Norway today.[32]

In the original constitution of 1814 the Montesquieu concept was enshrined, and the people at the time had the same skepticism about political parties as the American founding fathers and the revolutionaries in France. Nor did people really want to get rid of the king and the Council of State (privy council). King and council was a known concept that people had lived with for a long time and was for the most part comfortable with. The 1814 constitution came about as a reaction to external events, most notable the Treaty of Kiel see 1814 in Norway. There was no revolution against the current powers that had been be the case in the US and France.

As there was no election of the executive, the king reigned supremely independent in selecting the members of the Council of State, no formal political parties formed util the 1880s. A conflict between the executive and legislature started developing in the 1870s and climaxed with the legislature impeaching the entire Council of State in 1884. (See Statsrådssaken (Norwegian Wikipedia page))

With this came a switch to a parliamentary system of government and while the full process takes decades, it has led to a system of parliamentary sovereignty where the Montesquieu idea of separation of powers is technically dead even though the three branches remain important institutions.

This does not mean that there are no checks and balances. With the introduction of a parliamentary system, political parties started to form quickly and this led to a call for electoral reform that saw the introduction of a Party-list proportional representation in 1918. The peculiarities of the Norwegian election system generate 6–8 parties and make it extremely difficult for a single party to gain an absolute majority. It has only occurred for a brief period in the aftermath of World War II where the Labour Party had an absolute majority.

A multi-party system parliament that must either form a minority executive or a coalition executive function as a perfectly good system of checks and balances even if it was never a stated goal for the introduction of multiparty system. The multiparty system came about in response to a public outcry of having too few parties and a general feeling of a lack of representation. For this reason you'll find very little on the topic of separation of powers or checks and balances in the works of Norwegian political sciences today.

Prime Minister, Cabinet, Government Departments and Civil Service – executive

Courts – judiciary

The development of the British constitution, which is not a codified document, is based on this fusion in the person of the Monarch, who has a formal role to play in the legislature (Parliament, which is where legal and political sovereignty lies, is the Crown-in-Parliament, and is summoned and dissolved by the Sovereign who must give his or her Royal Assent to all Bills so that they become Acts), the executive (the Sovereign appoints all ministers of His/Her Majesty's Government, who govern in the name of the Crown) and the judiciary (the Sovereign, as the fount of justice, appoints all senior judges, and all public prosecutions are brought in his or her name).

Although the doctrine of separation of power plays a role in the United Kingdom's constitutional doctrine, the UK constitution is often described as having "a weak separation of powers" A. V. Dicey, despite its constitution being the one to which Montesquieu originally referred. For example, in the United Kingdom, the executive forms a subset of the legislature, as did—to a lesser extent—the judiciary until the establishment of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom. The Prime Minister, the Chief Executive, sits as a member of the Parliament of the United Kingdom, either as a peer in the House of Lords or as an elected member of the House of Commons (by convention, and as a result of the supremacy of the Lower House, the Prime Minister now sits in the House of Commons) and can effectively be removed from office by a simple majority vote. Furthermore, while the courts in the United Kingdom are amongst the most independent in the world,[citation needed] the Law Lords, who were the final arbiters of judicial disputes in the UK sat simultaneously in the House of Lords, the upper house of the legislature, although this arrangement ceased in 2009 when the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom came into existence. Furthermore, because of the existence of Parliamentary sovereignty, while the theory of separation of powers may be studied there, a system such as that of the UK is more accurately described as a "fusion of powers".[citation needed]

The judiciary has no power to strike down primary legislation, and can only rule on secondary legislation that it is invalid with regard to the primary legislation if necessary.

Under the concept of parliamentary sovereignty, Parliament can enact any primary legislation it chooses. However, the concept immediately becomes problematic when the question is asked; "If parliament can do anything, can it bind its successors?". It is generally held that parliament can do no such thing.

Equally, while statute takes precedence over precedent-derived common law and the judiciary has no power to strike down primary legislation, there are certain cases where the supreme judicature has effected an injunction against the application of an act or reliance on its authority by the civil service. The seminal example of this is the Factortame case, where the House of Lords granted such an injunction preventing the operation of the Merchant Shipping Act 1988 until litigation in the European Court of Justice had been resolved.

The House of Lords ruling in Factortame (No. 1), approving the European Court of Justice formulation that "a national court which, in a case before it concerning Community law, considers that the sole obstacle which precludes it from granting interim relief is a rule of national law, must disapply that rule", has created an implicit tiering of legislative reviewability; the only way for parliament to prevent the supreme judicature from injunctively striking out a law on the basis of incompatibility with Community law is to pass an act specifically removing that power from the court, or by repealing the European Communities Act 1972.

The British legal systems are based on common law traditions, which require:

Separation of powers was first established in the United States Constitution, the founding fathers included features of many new concepts, including hard-learned historical lessons about the checks and balances of power. Similar concepts were also prominent in the state governments of the United States. As colonies of Great Britain, the founding fathers considered that the American states had suffered an abuse of the broad power of parliamentarism and monarchy. As a remedy, the US Constitution limits the powers of the federal government through various means, in particular, the three branches of the federal government are divided by exercising different functions, and the executive and legislative powers are separated in origin by separate elections and the judiciary is kept independent, each branch controls the actions of others and balances its powers in some way.

In the United States Constitution, Article 1 Section I gives Congress only those "legislative powers herein granted" and proceeds to list those permissible actions in Article I Section 8, while Section 9 lists actions that are prohibited for Congress. The vesting clause in Article II places no limits on the Executive branch, simply stating that, "The Executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America."[33] The Supreme Court holds "The judicial Power" according to Article III, and it established the implication of Judicial review in Marbury v. Madison under the Marshall court.[34]

The presidential system adopted by the Constitution of the United States obeys the balance of powers sought, and not found, by the constitutional monarchy. The people appoint their representatives to meet periodically in a legislative body, and, since they do not have a king, the people themselves elect a preeminent citizen to perform, also periodically, the executive functions of the State. The direct election of the head of state or of the executive power is an inevitable consequence of the political freedom of the people, understood as the capacity to appoint and depose their leaders. Only this separate election of the person who has to fulfill the functions that the Constitution attributes to the president of the government, so different by its nature, and by its function, from the election of representatives of the electors, allows the executive power to be controlled by the legislative and submitted to the demands of political responsibility.[35]

Judicial independence is maintained by appointments for life that makes disappear very soon any sense of dependence on the Executive, with voluntary retirement and a high threshold of dismissal by the Legislature, in addition to a salary that can not be diminished during their service.

The federal government refers to the branches as "branches of government", while some systems use "government" to describe the executive. The Executive branch has attempted[36] to claim power arguing for separation of powers to include being the Commander in Chief of a standing army since the American Civil War, executive orders, emergency powers and security classifications since World War II, national security, signing statements, and the scope of the unitary executive.

«In order to lay a due foundation for that separate and distinct exercise of the different powers of government, which to a certain extent is admitted on all hands to be essential to the preservation of liberty, it is evident that each department should have a will of its own; and consequently should be so constituted that the members of each should have as little agency as possible in the appointment of the members of the others. Were this principle rigorously adhered to, it would require that all the appointments for the supreme executive, legislative, and judiciary magistracies should be drawn from the same fountain of authority, the people, through channels having no communication whatever with one another. Perhaps such a plan of constructing the several departments would be less difficult in practice than it may in contemplation appear. Some difficulties, however, and some additional expense would attend the execution of it. Some deviations, therefore, from the principle must be admitted. In the constitution of the judiciary department in particular, it might be inexpedient to insist rigorously on the principle: first, because peculiar qualifications being essential in the members, the primary consideration ought to be to select that mode of choice which best secures these qualifications; secondly, because the permanent tenure by which the appointments are held in that department, must soon destroy all sense of dependence on the authority conferring them.»

«It is equally evident, that the members of each department should be as little dependent as possible on those of the others, for the emoluments annexed to their offices. Were the executive magistrate, or the judges, not independent of the legislature in this particular, their independence in every other would be merely nominal.»

The president and vice president as well as the defunct National Assembly are constitutionally not part of the above five branches. Before being abolished in 2005, the National Assembly was a standing constituent assembly and electoral college for the president and vice president. Its constitutional amending powers were passed to the legislative yuan and its electoral powers were passed to the electorate.

The relationship between the executive and legislative branches are poorly defined. An example of the problems this causes is the near complete political paralysis that results when the president, who has neither the power to veto nor the ability to dissolve the legislature and call new elections, cannot negotiate with the legislature when his party is in the minority.[37] The examination and control yuans are marginal branches; their leaders as well as the leaders of the executive and judicial yuans are appointed by the president and confirmed by the legislative yuan. The legislature is the only branch that chooses its own leadership. The vice president has practically no responsibilities.

Belgium is currently a federated state that has imposed the trias politica on different governmental levels. The constitution of 1831, considered one of the most liberal of its time for limiting the powers of its monarch and imposing a rigorous system of separation of powers, is based on three principles (represented in the Schematic overview of Belgian institutions):

Trias Politica (horizontal separation of powers):

The legislative power is attributed to an elected parliamentary body elected with a representative general election system (one person one vote).

The executive power is attributed to the Council of Ministers. Ministers are formally appointed by the King, though in practice the prime minister decides the composition of his cabinet. The ministers are usually from the elected members of parliament (non-elected people can also be nominated). However, they must first resign from their elected seat.

The judicial power is in the hands of the courts. Magistrates are nominated by the minister (on proposal from a Council of the Magistrates).

Magistrates can be nominated to become a judge (sitting magistrates) or instructing judge (investigating judge) of Procureur (public prosecutor) (the standing magistrates).

The executive branch of the government is responsible to provide the physical means to execute its role (infrastructure, staff, financial means).

Judges and some other people cannot run for elected office while they are nominated to certain positions (military, police-officers, clergy, notaries, bailiffs).

Supranational directives (EU legislation) and international treaties are subjected to approval of the federal level (the federal level being Belgium the nation state)

The federal level is composed of the following:

A bicameral parliament (House of Representative and Senate) (in 2014 this will be a directly elected house and an indirectly appointed Senate of the regions)

A federal government (led by the Prime Minister and the ministers and secretaries of state)

Tasked with overseeing justice, defense, foreign affairs, and social security, public health

High Court, Constitutional Court, Cassation Court and Council of State

The regional level is composed of the following:

A monocameral parliament

A regional government led by the minister-president (ministers and secretaries of state) is tasked with regional matters.

Provinces also have similar structures:

A monocameral provincial council

A nominated provincial governor assisted by deputies is tasked with provincial matters.

Appellate Court, Assisses Court

An intermediate level of Arrondissements subdivides the provinces

it has only an executive level with an arrondissemental commissars

City and communal entities:

A city or communal council

A mayor, assisted by aldermen, is tasked with local matters.

Magistrates Court, Correctional Court (three judges).

Justice of the peace and Police Court judges (single judge courts)

Secularism (separation of state and religion):

The king, the head of state, holds no political authority and requires executive approval by a minister for every action and statement; he nominates the ministers but he does not choose them (his executive powers); he signs and decrees the laws voted in parliament (his legislative powers);

The head of state is commander in chief of the military (in title only), politically the military depends of the Minister of Defense and the chiefs of staff are responsible towards parliament and take their orders from the Minister of Defense and the government;

Certain functions are deemed incompatible and people must resign from their function if they want to assume responsibilities in another function (military commanders have never been government ministers, even during a war)

In the aftermath of the 43-day civil war in 1948 (after former President and incumbent candidate Rafael Álgel Calderón Guardia tried to take power through fraud, by not recognising the results of the presidential election that he had lost), the question of which transformational model the Costa Rican State would follow was the main issue that confronted the victors. A Constituent Assembly was elected by popular vote to draw up a new constitution, enacted in 1949, and remains in force. This document was an edit of the constitution of 1871, as the constituent assembly rejected more radical corporatist ideas proposed by the ruling Junta Fundadora de la Segunda República (which, although having come to power by military force, abolished the armed forces). Nonetheless, the new constitution increased centralization of power at the expense of municipalities and eliminated provincial government altogether, at the time it increased the powers of congress and the judiciary.

It established the three supreme powers as the legislature, executive, and judicial branches, but also created two other autonomous state organs that have equivalent power, but not equivalent rank. The first is the Tribunal Supremo de Elecciones de Costa Rica (electoral branch) which controls elections and makes unique, unappealable decisions on their outcomes.

The second is the office of the Comptroller General (audit branch), an autonomous and independent organ nominally subordinate to the unicameral legislative assembly. All budgets of ministries and municipalities must pass through this agency, including the execution of budget items such as contracting for routine operations. The Comptroller also provides financial vigilance over government offices and office holders, and routinely brings actions to remove mayors for malfeasance, firmly establishing this organization as the fifth branch of the Republic.

The European Union is a supranational polity, and is neither a country nor a federation; but as the EU wields political power it complies with the principle of separation of powers. There are seven institutions of the European Union. In intergovernmental matters, most power is concentrated in the Council of the European Union—giving it the characteristics of a normal international organization. Here, all power at the EU level is in one branch. In the latter there are four main actors. The European Commission acts as an independent executive which is appointed by the Council in conjunction with the European Parliament; but the Commission also has a legislative role as the sole initiator of EU legislation.[38][39][40] An early maxim was: "The Commission proposes and the Council disposes"; and although the EU's lawmaking procedure is now much more complicated, this simple maxim still holds some truth. As well as both executive and legislative functions, the Commission arguably exercises a third, quasi-judicial, function under Articles 101 & 102 TFEU (competition law ); although the ECJ remains the final arbiter. The European Parliament is one half of the legislative branch and is directly elected. The Council itself acts both as the second half of the legislative branch and also holds some executive functions (some of which are exercised by the related European Council in practice). The European Court of Justice acts as the independent judicial branch, interpreting EU law and treaties. The remaining institution, the European Court of Auditors, is an independent audit authority (due to the sensitive nature of fraud in the EU).

Besides the constitutional court the judicial branch at the federal level is made up of five supreme courts—one for civil and criminal cases (Bundesgerichtshof), and one each for administrative, tax, labour, and social security issues. There are also state (Länder / Bundesländer) based courts beneath them, and a rarely used senate of the supreme courts.

This article's factual accuracy may be compromised due to out-of-date information. Please update this article to reflect recent events or newly available information.(August 2014)

The four independent branches of power in Hungary (the parliament, the government, the court system, and the office of the public accuser) are divided into six bodies:

Parliament (Magyar Országgyűlés): elected every 4 years by the people in a highly complex, one-round voting system

Government (Magyar Kormány): installed and removed by 50%+1 basic majority vote of the parliament, 4-year terms

Supreme Court (Legfelsőbb Bíróság): Chief justice elected by qualified (2/3) majority of the parliament, no government oversight

Constitutional court (Alkotmánybíróság): members elected by qualified majority of the parliament for 8 years, this body nullifies laws and has no government oversight.

Chief public accuser (Legfőbb ügyész): elected by qualified majority of the parliament, 6-year terms, office budget fixed, no government oversight.

The President of the Republic (Köztársasági Elnök) is elected by qualified majority of the Hungarian parliament for 5-year terms (cannot be reelected more than once). The President's task is to oversee the functioning of the democracy. Most of his/her powers are ceremonial only: like signing laws into power and commanding the military in time of peace. But before signing, once he/she can also return accepted bills with advices to the Parliament for reconsideration, he/she can also request nullification in advance from the Constitutional Court. He can negotiate with civil/professional unions regarding the bills. Without the President's permission, the country can neither declare war nor deploy the armed forces.

The independent pillar status of the Hungarian public accuser's office is a unique construction, loosely modeled on the system Portugal introduced after the 1974 victory of the Carnation Revolution. The public accuser (attorney general) body has become the fourth column of Hungarian democracy only in recent times: after communism fell in 1989, the office was made independent by a new clausule XI. of the Constitution. The change was meant to prevent abuse of state power, especially with regards to the use of false accusations against opposition politicians, who may be excluded from elections if locked in protracted or excessively severe court cases.

To prevent the Hungarian accuser's office from neglecting its duties, natural human private persons can submit investigation requests, called "pótmagánvád" directly to the courts, if the accusers' office refuses to do its job. Courts will decide if the allegations have merit and order police to act in lieu of the accuser's office if warranted. In its decision No. 42/2005 the Hungarian constitutional court declared that the government does not enjoy such privilege and the state is powerless to further pursue cases if the public accuser refuses to do so.

The Empire of Brazil had, in addition to the three traditional powers, the moderating power, which was exercised solely by the Emperor,[41] and which function was resolving conflicts between the other powers.

^Ward, Lee (2014-12-04). Modern Democracy and the Theological-Political Problem in Spinoza, Rousseau, and Jefferson. Recovering Political Philosophy. Palgrave Macmillan (published 2014). pp. 25–26. ISBN9781137475053. Retrieved 2015-11-03. Calvin's republican sympathies derived from his view of human nature as deeply flawed. Compound or mixed governments reflect the reality that human frailty justifies and necessitates institutional checks and balances to the magistrate's presumed propensity to abuse power. It was this commitment to checks and balances that became the basis of Calvin's resistance theory, according to which inferior magistrates have a duty to resist or restrain a tyrannical sovereign.

^All presidential appointments are subject to advice and consent of solely the Senate, with the exception of the appointment of a Vice President under the Twenty-fifth Amendment, which also requires a majority vote of the House of Representatives.

^The parliamentary dialectic is a legally significant and a protected value, as evidenced by the decision no. 32 of 2014 and the favor with which you see in it the maintenance "within the constitutional framework" of "institutional relations between the Government, Parliament and President of the Republic in the performance of the legislative function": Buonomo, Giampiero (2014). "Governo e revisione costituzionale". Mondoperaio edizione online. – via Questia(subscription required)

1.
Politics
–
Politics is the process of making decisions applying to all members of each group. More narrowly, it refers to achieving and exercising positions of governance — organized control over a human community, furthermore, politics is the study or practice of the distribution of power and resources within a given community as well as the interrelationship between communities. It is very often said that politics is about power, a political system is a framework which defines acceptable political methods within a given society. History of political thought can be traced back to antiquity, with seminal works such as Platos Republic, Aristotles Politics. Formal Politics refers to the operation of a system of government and publicly defined institutions. Political parties, public policy or discussions about war and foreign affairs would fall under the category of Formal Politics, many people view formal politics as something outside of themselves, but that can still affect their daily lives. Semi-formal Politics is Politics in government associations such as neighborhood associations, informal Politics is understood as forming alliances, exercising power and protecting and advancing particular ideas or goals. Generally, this includes anything affecting ones daily life, such as the way an office or household is managed, informal Politics is typically understood as everyday politics, hence the idea that politics is everywhere. The word comes from the same Greek word from which the title of Aristotles book Politics also derives, the book title was rendered in Early Modern English in the mid-15th century as Polettiques, it became politics in Modern English. The history of politics is reflected in the origin, development, the origin of the state is to be found in the development of the art of warfare. Historically speaking, all communities of the modern type owe their existence to successful warfare. Kings, emperors and other types of monarchs in many countries including China, of the institutions that ruled states, that of kingship stood at the forefront until the French Revolution put an end to the divine right of kings. Nevertheless, the monarchy is among the political institutions, dating as early as 2100 BC in Sumeria to the 21st century AD British Monarchy. Kingship becomes an institution through the institution of Hereditary monarchy, the king often, even in absolute monarchies, ruled his kingdom with the aid of an elite group of advisors, a council without which he could not maintain power. As these advisors and others outside the monarchy negotiated for power, constitutional monarchies emerged, long before the council became a bulwark of democracy, it rendered invaluable aid to the institution of kingship by, Preserving the institution of kingship through heredity. Preserving the traditions of the social order, being able to withstand criticism as an impersonal authority. Being able to manage a greater deal of knowledge and action than an individual such as the king. The greatest of the subordinates, the earls and dukes in England and Scotland

2.
Political economy
–
Political economy is a term used for studying production and trade, and their relations with law, custom, and government, as well as with the distribution of national income and wealth. Political economy originated in moral philosophy and it was developed in the 18th century as the study of the economies of states, or polities, hence the term political economy. In the late 19th century, the term came to replace political economy. Earlier, William Stanley Jevons, a proponent of mathematical methods applied to the subject, advocated economics for brevity and it is available as an area of study in certain colleges and universities. Originally, political economy meant the study of the conditions under which production or consumption within limited parameters was organized in nation-states, in that way, political economy expanded the emphasis of economics, which comes from the Greek oikos and nomos. Thus, political economy was meant to express the laws of production of wealth at the state level, the phrase économie politique first appeared in France in 1615 with the well-known book by Antoine de Montchrétien, Traité de l’economie politique. The French physiocrats, along with Adam Smith, John Stuart Mill, David Ricardo, Henry George, the worlds first professorship in political economy was established in 1754 at the University of Naples Federico II in southern Italy. The Neapolitan philosopher Antonio Genovesi was the first tenured professor, in 1763, Joseph von Sonnenfels was appointed a Political Economy chair at the University of Vienna, Austria. Thomas Malthus, in 1805, became Englands first professor of economy, at the East India Company College, Haileybury. This left the class of 1998 as the last to be graduated with a Master of Arts in Political Economy. In the United States, political economy first was taught at the College of William and Mary, an early and continuing focus of that research program is what came to be called constitutional political economy. Other traditional topics include analysis of public policy issues as economic regulation, monopoly, rent-seeking, market protection, institutional corruption. From the mid-1990s, the field has expanded, in part aided by new data sets that allow tests of hypotheses on comparative economic systems. New political economy may treat economic ideologies as the phenomenon to explain, thus, Charles S. Maier suggests that a political economy approach interrogates economic doctrines to disclose their sociological and political premises. In sum, regards economic ideas and behavior not as frameworks for analysis and this approach informs Andrew Gambles The Free Economy and the Strong State, and Colin Hays The Political Economy of New Labour. It also informs much work published in New Political Economy, a journal founded by Sheffield University scholars in 1996. International political economy is a field comprising approaches to the actions of various actors. They are also associated with the journal The Review of International Political Economy, there also is a more critical school of IPE, inspired by thinkers such as Antonio Gramsci and Karl Polanyi, two major figures are Matthew Watson and Robert W. Cox

3.
Political history of the world
–
The political history of the world is the history of the various political entities created by the human race throughout their existence and the way these states define their borders. Throughout history, political entities have expanded from basic systems of self-governance and monarchy to the complex democratic, in parallel, political systems have expanded from vaguely defined frontier-type boundaries, to the national definite boundaries existing today. In ancient history, civilizations did not have definite boundaries as states have today, early dynastic Sumer, and early dynastic Egypt were the first civilizations to define their borders. Moreover, for the past 200,000 years and up to the twentieth century and these range from relatively egalitarian bands and tribes to complex and highly stratified chiefdoms. The first states of sorts were those of early dynastic Sumer and early dynastic Egypt, early dynastic Egypt was based around the Nile River in the north-east of Africa, the kingdoms boundaries being based around the Nile and stretching to areas where oases existed. Early dynastic Sumer was located in southern Mesopotamia with its borders extending from the Persian Gulf to parts of the Euphrates, by 2500 BCE the Indus Valley Civilization, located in modern-day India, Pakistan and Afghanistan had formed. The civilizations boundaries extended 600 km inland from the Arabian Sea, the boundaries of this empire extended hundreds of kilometers. Notably, the European states of the Dark Ages and Middle Ages gained their authority from the Roman Catholic religion, when China entered the Sui Dynasty, the government changed and expanded in its borders as the many separate bureaucracies unified under one banner. This evolved into the Tang Dynasty when Li Yuan took control of China in 626, by now, the Chinese borders had expanded from eastern China, up north into the Tang Empire. The Tang Empire fell apart in 907 and split into ten regional kingdoms, after the death of Prophet Muhammad in 632, the Quran and the teachings of Islam inspired the genesis of a new civilization. In less than a century, the Islamic Caliphate rapidly extended its reach from the Atlantic Ocean, the period between the 8th and 13th century saw a flourishing of trade, as well as several advances in science, engineering, medecine and mathematics. Over most of the continent, the peoples were emerging around ethnic, linguistic and geographical groups, in the course of this process, some countries, such as Poland under the Partitions and France in the High Middle Ages, almost ceased to exist as states for periods. The Low Countries, in the Middle Ages as distinct a country as France, became divided, today into Belgium. Spain was formed as a state by the dynastic union of small Christian kingdoms, augmented by the final campaigns of the Reconquista against Al-Andaluz. In 1299 CE, the Aztec empire arose in lower Mexico,200 years after the Aztec and Toltec empires began, northern and central Asia saw the rise of the Mongol empire. By the late 13th century, the Empire extended across Europe and Asia, in 1299, the Ottomans entered the scene. These Turkish nomads took control of Asia Minor along with much of central Europe over a period of 370 years, exploiting opportunities left open by the Mongolian advance and recession as well as the spread of Islam. Russia took control of their homeland around 1613, after years being dominated by the Tartars

4.
Political philosophy
–
In a vernacular sense, the term political philosophy often refers to a general view, or specific ethic, political belief or attitude, about politics, synonymous to the term political ideology. Chinese political philosophy dates back to the Spring and Autumn period, Chinese political philosophy was developed as a response to the social and political breakdown of the country characteristic of the Spring and Autumn period and the Warring States period. The major philosophies during the period, Confucianism, Legalism, Mohism, Agrarianism and Taoism, philosophers such as Confucius, Mencius, and Mozi, focused on political unity and political stability as the basis of their political philosophies. Confucianism advocated a hierarchical, meritocratic government based on empathy, loyalty, Legalism advocated a highly authoritarian government based on draconian punishments and laws. Mohism advocated a communal, decentralized government centered on frugality and ascetism, the Agrarians advocated a peasant utopian communalism and egalitarianism. Legalism was the dominant political philosophy of the Qin Dynasty, but was replaced by State Confucianism in the Han Dynasty, prior to Chinas adoption of communism, State Confucianism remained the dominant political philosophy of China up to the 20th century. Western political philosophy originates in the philosophy of ancient Greece, where political philosophy dates back to at least Plato, ancient Greece was dominated by city-states, which experimented with various forms of political organization, grouped by Plato into four categories, timocracy, tyranny, democracy and oligarchy. One of the first, extremely important classical works of philosophy is Platos Republic. Roman political philosophy was influenced by the Stoics and the Roman statesman Cicero, Indian political philosophy evolved in ancient times and demarcated a clear distinction between nation and state religion and state. The constitutions of Hindu states evolved over time and were based on political and legal treatises, the institutions of state were broadly divided into governance, administration, defense, law and order. Mantranga, the governing body of these states, consisted of the King, Prime Minister, Commander in chief of army. The Prime Minister headed the committee of ministers along with head of executive, chanakya, 4th century BC Indian political philosopher. Another influential extant Indian treatise on philosophy is the Sukra Neeti. An example of a code of law in ancient India is the Manusmṛti or Laws of Manu, the early Christian philosophy of Augustine of Hippo was heavily influenced by Plato. Augustine also preached that one was not a member of his or her city, augustines City of God is an influential work of this period that attacked the thesis, held by many Christian Romans, that the Christian view could be realized on Earth. Thomas Aquinas meticulously dealt with the varieties of law, according to Aquinas, there are four kinds of law, Eternal law Divine positive law Natural law Human law Aquinas never discusses the nature or categorization of canon law. There is scholarly debate surrounding the place of law within the Thomistic jurisprudential framework. Aquinas was an influential thinker in the Natural Law tradition

5.
Anarchy
–
Anarchy is the condition of a society, entity, group of people, or a single person that rejects hierarchy. The term originally meant leaderlessness, but in 1840, Pierre-Joseph Proudhon adopted the term in his treatise What Is Property, to refer to a new political philosophy, anarchism, which advocates stateless societies based on voluntary associations. In practical terms, anarchy can refer to the curtailment or abolition of traditional forms of government and it could also mean a nation or anywhere on earth that is inhabited, that has no system of government or central rule. The word anarchy comes from the ancient Greek ἀναρχία, which combines ἀ, not, without and ἀρχή, ruler, leader, thus, the term refers to a person or society without rulers or without leaders. The German philosopher Immanuel Kant treated anarchy in his Anthropology from a Pragmatic Point of View as consisting of Law and Freedom without Force. Thus, for Kant, anarchy falls short of being a civil state because the law is only an empty recommendation if force is not included to make this law efficacious. For there to be such a state, force must be included while law and freedom are maintained, Kant identified four kinds of government, Law and freedom without force. Anarchism is a philosophy that advocates self-governed societies based on voluntary institutions. These are often described as stateless societies, although several authors have defined them more specifically as institutions based on non-hierarchical free associations, Anarchism holds the state to be undesirable, unnecessary, or harmful. While anti-statism is central, anarchism entails opposing authority or hierarchical organisation in the conduct of all relations, including, but not limited to. There are many types and traditions of anarchism, not all of which are mutually exclusive, Anarchist schools of thought can differ fundamentally, supporting anything from extreme individualism to complete collectivism. Strains of anarchism have been divided into the categories of social, some individualist anarchists are also socialists or communists while some anarcho-communists are also individualists or egoists. Anarchism as a movement has regularly endured fluctuations in popularity. Since the 1890s, the term libertarianism has been used as a synonym for anarchism and was used almost exclusively in this sense until the 1950s in the United States, right-libertarians are divided into minarchists and anarcho-capitalists or voluntarists. Outside the English-speaking world, libertarianism generally retains its association with left-wing anarchism, many of these societies can be considered to be anarchic in the sense that they explicitly reject the idea of centralized political authority. The egalitarianism typical of human hunter-gatherers is interesting when viewed in an evolutionary context, one of humanitys two closest primate relatives, the chimpanzee, is anything but egalitarian, forming hierarchies that are dominated by alpha males. In Society Against the State Pierre Clastres examines stateless societies where cultural practices and attitudes avert the development of hierarchy. He dismisses the notion that the state is the outcome of the evolution of human societies

6.
City-state
–
A city-state is a sovereign state that consists of a city and its dependent territories. A great deal of consensus exists that the term applies to Singapore, Monaco. A number of small states share similar characteristics, and therefore are sometimes also cited as modern city-states. Occasionally, other states with high population densities, such as San Marino, are also cited. Several non-sovereign cities enjoy a degree of autonomy, and are sometimes considered city-states. Hong Kong and Macau, along with independent members of the United Arab Emirates, most notably Dubai, scholars have classed the Viking colonial cities in medieval Ireland, most importantly Dublin, as city-states. In Cyprus, the Phoenician settlement of Kition was a city-state that existed from around 800 BC until the end of the 4th century BC. The success of regional units coexisting as autonomous actors in loose geographical and cultural unity, as in Italy and Greece. However, such small political entities often survived only for short periods because they lacked the resources to defend themselves against incursions by larger states, thus they inevitably gave way to larger organisations of society, including the empire and the nation-state. In the history of Mainland Southeast Asia, aristocratic groups, Buddhist leaders, the system existed until the 19th century when colonization by European powers, and Thailands resulted in the adoption of the modern concept of statehood. In the Holy Roman Empire the Free Imperial Cities enjoyed a considerable autonomy, some, like the three Hanseatic cities of Bremen, Hamburg and Lübeck, pooled their economic relations with foreign powers and were able to wield considerable diplomatic clout. Under Habsburg rule the city of Fiume had the status of a Corpus separatum, a later city-state, though lacking sovereignty, was West Berlin, being a state legally not belonging to any other state, but ruled by the Western Allies. They allowed – notwithstanding their overlordship as occupant powers – its internal organisation as one state simultaneously being a city, though West Berlin maintained close ties to the West German Federal Republic of Germany, it was legally never part of it. But the idea of leaving the United States proved too radical even in the turmoil of 1861 and was poorly received, the war, and especially conscription, was nevertheless often unpopular in the city, sparking the deadly New York Draft Riots. The neighboring City of Brooklyn, in contrast, was staunchly Unionist, the Free City of Danzig was a semi-autonomous city-state that existed between 1920 and 1939, consisting of the Baltic Sea port of Danzig and nearly 200 towns in the surrounding areas. It was created on 15 November 1920 under the terms of Article 100 of the 1919 Treaty of Versailles after the end of World War I. Its territory of 28 km2 comprised the city of Fiume and rural areas to its north, with a corridor to its west connecting it to Italy, the Shanghai International Settlement was an international zone with its own legal system, postal service, and currency. The Klaipėda Region or Memel Territory was defined by the Treaty of Versailles in 1920 when it was put under the administration of the Council of Ambassadors

7.
Democracy
–
Democracy, in modern usage, is a system of government in which the citizens exercise power directly or elect representatives from among themselves to form a governing body, such as a parliament. Democracy is sometimes referred to as rule of the majority, Democracy was originally conceived in Classical Greece, where political representatives were chosen by a jury from amongst the male citizens, rich and poor. The English word dates to the 16th century, from the older Middle French, in the 5th century BC, to denote the political systems then existing in Greek city-states, notably Athens, the term is an antonym to aristocracy, meaning rule of an elite. While theoretically these definitions are in opposition, in practice the distinction has been blurred historically, the political system of Classical Athens, for example, granted democratic citizenship to free men and excluded slaves and women from political participation. In 1906, Finland became the first government to harald a more inclusive democracy at the national level. Democracy contrasts with forms of government where power is held by an individual, as in an absolute monarchy, or where power is held by a small number of individuals. Nevertheless, these oppositions, inherited from Greek philosophy, are now ambiguous because contemporary governments have mixed democratic, oligarchic, and monarchic elements. Karl Popper defined democracy in contrast to dictatorship or tyranny, thus focusing on opportunities for the people to control their leaders, No consensus exists on how to define democracy, but legal equality, political freedom and rule of law have been identified as important characteristics. These principles are reflected in all eligible citizens being equal before the law, other uses of democracy include that of direct democracy. In some countries, notably in the United Kingdom which originated the Westminster system, in the United States, separation of powers is often cited as a central attribute. In India, parliamentary sovereignty is subject to the Constitution of India which includes judicial review, though the term democracy is typically used in the context of a political state, the principles also are applicable to private organisations. Majority rule is listed as a characteristic of democracy. Hence, democracy allows for political minorities to be oppressed by the tyranny of the majority in the absence of legal protections of individual or group rights. An essential part of a representative democracy is competitive elections that are substantively and procedurally fair, i. e. just. It has also suggested that a basic feature of democracy is the capacity of all voters to participate freely and fully in the life of their society. While representative democracy is sometimes equated with the form of government. Many democracies are constitutional monarchies, such as the United Kingdom, the term democracy first appeared in ancient Greek political and philosophical thought in the city-state of Athens during classical antiquity. The word comes from demos, common people and kratos, strength, led by Cleisthenes, Athenians established what is generally held as the first democracy in 508–507 BC

8.
Dictatorship
–
A dictatorship is a type of authoritarianism, in which politicians regulate nearly every aspect of the public and private behavior of citizens. Dictatorship and totalitarianism societies generally employ political propaganda to decrease the influence of proponents of alternative governing systems, in the past different religious tactics were used by the dictators to maintain their rule. Like the Monarchy system in the west, in the 19th and 20th centuries, traditional monarchies gradually declined and disappeared. Dictatorship and constitutional democracy emerged as the two major forms of government. Since World War II a broader range of dictatorships have been recognized including Third World dictatorships, theocratic or religious dictatorships, in the Roman Empire, a Roman dictator was the incumbent of a political office of legislate of the Roman Republic. Roman dictators were allocated absolute power during times of emergency and their power was originally neither arbitrary nor unaccountable, being subject to law and requiring retrospective justification. There were no such dictatorships after the beginning of the 2nd century BC, and later such as Sulla. After the collapse of Spanish colonial rule, various dictators came to power in many liberated countries, such dictators have been also referred to as personalismo. The wave of military dictatorships in Latin America in the half of the twentieth century left a particular mark on Latin American culture. In Latin American literature, the dictator novel challenging dictatorship and caudillismo is a significant genre, there are also many films depicting Latin American military dictatorships. After World War II, dictators established themselves in the new states of Africa and Asia. These constitutions often failed to work without a middle class or work against the preexisting autocratic rule. Some elected presidents and prime ministers captured power by suppressing the opposition and installing one-party rule, whatever their form, these dictatorships had an adverse impact on economic growth and the quality of political institutions. Dictators who stayed in office for a time period found it increasingly difficult to carry out sound economic policies. The often-cited exploitative dictator is the regime of Mobutu Sese Seko, the global dynamics of democratization has been a central question for political scientists. The Third Wave Democracy was said to turn some dictatorships into democracies, the DD index is seen as an example of the minimalist approach, whereas the Polity data series, relatively more substantive. The most general term is despotism, a form of government in which a single entity rules with absolute power and that entity may be an individual, as in an autocracy, or it may be a group, as in an oligarchy. Despotism can mean tyranny, or absolutism, or dictatorship, dictatorship may take the form of authoritarianism or totalitarianism

9.
Directorial system
–
A directorial republic is a country ruled by a college of several people who jointly exercise the powers of a head of state or a head of government. This system of government is in contrast both with presidential republics and parliamentary republics, in political history, the term directory, in French directoire, is applied to high collegial institutions of state composed of members styled director. The most important of these by far was the Directory of 1795–1799 in France, the system was inspired by the Pennsylvania Constitution of 1776, which prominently featured a collegial 12-member Supreme Executive Council with a primus inter pares President. Variants of this form of government, based on the French model, were established in the European regions conquered by France during the French Revolutionary Wars. In the past, Uruguay, Yugoslavia, Ukraine, and other countries were ruled by directories, the government of the Soviet Union could in some ways be characterized as a directory, but it developed in a much different pattern discussed in the article on Communist states. The sole country now using this form of government is Switzerland, the Swiss Federal Council is elected by the Parliament for four years, and is composed of seven members, among whom one is President and one is Vice-President, although these are relatively symbolic. There is no relationship of confidence between Parliament and the Federal Council and it is a shared system of government that reflects and represents the heterogeneity and multiethnicity of the Swiss people. Direct popular elections are used at the local level, a Directorial System is a system of government in which the executive power is split a select number of individual who are, or de facto are, equals. Some have argued that such as Andorra are directorial as executive power is held between more than one person

10.
Feudalism
–
Feudalism was a combination of legal and military customs in medieval Europe that flourished between the 9th and 15th centuries. Broadly defined, it was a way of structuring society around relationships derived from the holding of land in exchange for service or labour, since the publication of Elizabeth A. R. There is no commonly accepted definition of feudalism, at least among scholars. Since the publication of Elizabeth A. R, outside a European context, the concept of feudalism is often used only by analogy, most often in discussions of feudal Japan under the shoguns, and sometimes medieval and Gondarine Ethiopia. The term feudalism has also been applied—often inappropriately or pejoratively—to non-Western societies where institutions, the term féodal was used in 17th-century French legal treatises and translated into English legal treatises as an adjective, such as feodal government. In the 18th century, Adam Smith, seeking to describe systems, effectively coined the forms feudal government. In the 19th century the adjective feudal evolved into a noun, the term feudalism is recent, first appearing in French in 1823, Italian in 1827, English in 1839, and in German in the second half of the 19th century. The term feudal or feodal is derived from the medieval Latin word feodum, the etymology of feodum is complex with multiple theories, some suggesting a Germanic origin and others suggesting an Arabic origin. Initially in medieval Latin European documents, a grant in exchange for service was called a beneficium. Later, the term feudum, or feodum, began to replace beneficium in the documents, the first attested instance of this is from 984, although more primitive forms were seen up to one-hundred years earlier. The origin of the feudum and why it replaced beneficium has not been well established, the most widely held theory is put forth by Marc Bloch. Bloch said it is related to the Frankish term *fehu-ôd, in which means cattle and -ôd means goods. This was known as feos, a term that took on the meaning of paying for something in lieu of money. This meaning was then applied to itself, in which land was used to pay for fealty. Thus the old word feos meaning movable property changed little by little to feus meaning the exact opposite and this Germanic origin theory was also shared by William Stubbs in the 19th century. Another theory was put forward by Archibald R. Lewis, Lewis said the origin of fief is not feudum, but rather foderum, the earliest attested use being in Astronomuss Vita Hludovici. In that text is a passage about Louis the Pious that says annona militaris quas vulgo foderum vocant, another theory by Alauddin Samarrai suggests an Arabic origin, from fuyū. Samarrais theory is that early forms of fief include feo, feu, feuz, feuum and others, indeed, the first use of these terms is in Languedoc, one of the least Germanic areas of Europe and bordering Muslim Spain

11.
Monarchy
–
The actual power of the monarch may vary from purely symbolic, to partial and restricted, to completely autocratic. Traditionally and in most cases, the monarchs post is inherited and lasts until death or abdication, occasionally this might create a situation of rival claimants whose legitimacy is subject to effective election. Finally, there have been cases where the term of a reign is either fixed in years or continues until certain goals are achieved. Thus there are widely divergent structures and traditions defining monarchy, Monarchy was the most common form of government until the 19th century, but it is no longer prevalent. Currently,47 sovereign nations in the world have monarchs acting as heads of state,19 of which are Commonwealth realms that recognise Queen Elizabeth II as their head of state. The monarchs of Cambodia, Japan, and Malaysia reign, the word monarch comes from the Greek language word μονάρχης, monárkhēs which referred to a single, at least nominally absolute ruler. In current usage the word usually refers to a traditional system of hereditary rule. Depending on the held by the monarch, a monarchy may be known as a kingdom, principality, duchy, grand duchy, empire, tsardom, emirate, sultanate, khaganate. The form of societal hierarchy known as chiefdom or tribal kingship is prehistoric, the Greek term monarchia is classical, used by Herodotus. The monarch in classical antiquity is often identified as king, the Chinese, Japanese and Nepalese monarchs continued to be considered living Gods into the modern period. Since antiquity, monarchy has contrasted with forms of democracy, where power is wielded by assemblies of free citizens. In antiquity, monarchies were abolished in favour of such assemblies in Rome, much of 19th century politics was characterised by the division between anti-monarchist Radicalism and monarchist Conservativism. Many countries abolished the monarchy in the 20th century and became republics, advocacy of republics is called republicanism, while advocacy of monarchies is called monarchism. In the modern era, monarchies are more prevalent in small states than in large ones, most monarchs, both historically and in the modern day, have been born and brought up within a royal family, the centre of the royal household and court. Growing up in a family, future monarchs are often trained for the responsibilities of expected future rule. Different systems of succession have been used, such as proximity of blood, primogeniture, and agnatic seniority. While most monarchs have been male, many female monarchs also have reigned in history, rule may be hereditary in practice without being considered a monarchy, such as that of family dictatorships or political families in many democracies. The principal advantage of hereditary monarchy is the continuity of leadership

12.
Parliamentary system
–
In a parliamentary system, the head of state is usually a different person from the head of government. Since ancient times, when societies were tribal, there were councils or a headman whose decisions were assessed by village elders, eventually these councils have slowly evolved into the modern Parliamentary system. The first parliaments date back to Europe in the Middle Ages, for example in 1188 Alfonso IX, the modern concept of parliamentary government emerged in the Kingdom of Great Britain and its contemporary, the Parliamentary System in Sweden. In England, Simon de Montfort is remembered as one of the fathers of representative government for holding two famous parliaments, the first, in 1258, stripped the King of unlimited authority and the second, in 1265, included ordinary citizens from the towns. Later, in the 17th century, the Parliament of England pioneered some of the ideas and systems of liberal democracy culminating in the Glorious Revolution, in the Kingdom of Great Britain, the monarch, in theory, chaired cabinet and chose ministers. In practice, King George Is inability to speak English led the responsibility for chairing cabinet to go to the minister, literally the prime or first minister. By the nineteenth century, the Great Reform Act of 1832 led to parliamentary dominance, with its choice invariably deciding who was prime minister, hence the use of phrases like Her Majestys government or His Excellencys government. Nineteenth century urbanisation, industrial revolution and, modernism had already fueled the political struggle for democracy. In the radicalised times at the end of World War I, a parliamentary system may be either bicameral, with two chambers of parliament or unicameral, with just one parliamentary chamber. Scholars of democracy such as Arend Lijphart distinguish two types of parliamentary democracies, the Westminster and Consensus systems, the Westminster system is usually found in the Commonwealth of Nations and countries which were influenced by the British political tradition. These parliaments tend to have a more style of debate. The Australian House of Representatives is elected using instant-runoff voting, while the Senate is elected using proportional representation through single transferable vote, regardless of which system is used, the voting systems tend to allow the voter to vote for a named candidate rather than a closed list. The Western European parliamentary model tends to have a more consensual debating system, Consensus systems have more of a tendency to use proportional representation with open party lists than the Westminster Model legislatures. The committees of these Parliaments tend to be more important than the plenary chamber, some West European countries parliaments implement the principle of dualism as a form of separation of powers. In countries using this system, Members of Parliament have to resign their place in Parliament upon being appointed minister, ministers in those countries usually actively participate in parliamentary debates, but are not entitled to vote. Some countries such as India also require the prime minister to be a member of the legislature, the head of state appoints a prime minister who will likely have majority support in parliament. The head of state appoints a minister who must gain a vote of confidence within a set time. The head of state appoints the leader of the party holding a plurality of seats in parliament as prime minister

13.
Presidential system
–
A presidential system is a system of government where a head of government is also head of state and leads an executive branch that is separate from the legislative branch. The United States, for instance, has a presidential system, the executive is elected and often titled president and is not responsible to the legislature, which cannot in normal circumstances dismiss it. Presidential systems are numerous, but the following are true, The executive can veto legislative acts and, in turn. The veto is generally derived from the British tradition of royal assent in which an act of parliament can only be enacted with the assent of the monarch, the president has a fixed term of office. Members of the cabinet serve at the pleasure of the president, cabinet ministers or executive departmental chiefs are not members of the legislature. However, presidential systems often need legislative approval of executive nominations to the cabinet, judiciary, a president generally can direct members of the cabinet, military, or any officer or employee of the executive branch, but cannot direct or dismiss judges. The president can often pardon or commute sentences of convicted criminals, countries that feature a presidential system of government are not the exclusive users of the title of president. For example, a dictator, who may or may not have been popularly or legitimately elected may be, likewise, leaders of one-party states are often called presidents. Most parliamentary republics have presidents, but this position is ceremonial, notable examples include Germany, India, Ireland, Israel. The title is used in parliamentary republics with an executive presidency. In a full-fledged presidential system, a president is chosen directly by the people or indirectly by the party to be the head of the executive branch. Presidential governments make no distinction between the positions of head of state and head of government, both of which are held by the president, a few countries have powerful presidents who are elected by the legislature. These executives are titled president, whereas in practice they are similar to prime ministers, other countries with the same system include Botswana, the Marshall Islands, Nauru, and Suriname. By contrast, national presidents are figurehead heads of state, like constitutional monarchs, such symbolic presidents can be directly elected by the people or indirectly by a legislative vote. Only a few nations, such as Ireland, have a popularly elected ceremonial president, subnational governments, usually states, may be structured as presidential systems. All of the governments in the United States use the presidential system. On a local level, many cities use Council-manager government, which is equivalent to a parliamentary system, some countries without a presidential system at the national level use a form of this system at a subnational or local level. Supporters generally claim four basic advantages for presidential systems, Direct elections — in a presidential system and this makes the presidents power more legitimate than that of a leader appointed indirectly

14.
Republic
–
It is a government where the head of state is not a monarch. Both modern and ancient republics vary widely in their ideology, composition, in the classical and medieval period of Europe, many states were fashioned on the Roman Republic, which referred to the governance of the city of Rome, between it having kings and emperors. The Italian medieval and Renaissance political tradition, today referred to as humanism, is sometimes considered to derive directly from Roman republicans such as Sallust. Republics were not equated with classical democracies such as Athens, but had a democratic aspect, Republics became more common in the Western world starting in the late 18th century, eventually displacing absolute monarchy as the most common form of government in Europe. In modern republics, the executive is legitimized both by a constitution and by popular suffrage, for instance, Article IV of the United States Constitution guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican form of Government. The term originates as the Latin translation of Greek word politeia, cicero, among other Latin writers, translated politeia as res publica and it was in turn translated by Renaissance scholars as republic. The term politeia can be translated as form of government, polity, or regime, and is therefore not always a word for a specific type of regime as the modern word republic is. And also amongst classical Latin, the term republic can be used in a way to refer to any regime. In medieval Northern Italy, a number of city states had commune or signoria based governments, in the late Middle Ages, writers, such as Giovanni Villani, began writing about the nature of these states and the differences from other types of regime. They used terms such as libertas populi, a free people, the terminology changed in the 15th century as the renewed interest in the writings of Ancient Rome caused writers to prefer using classical terminology. To describe non-monarchical states writers, most importantly Leonardo Bruni, adopted the Latin phrase res publica. While Bruni and Machiavelli used the term to describe the states of Northern Italy, which were not monarchies, the term can quite literally be translated as public matter. It was most often used by Roman writers to refer to the state and government, in subsequent centuries, the English word commonwealth came to be used as a translation of res publica, and its use in English was comparable to how the Romans used the term res publica. Notably, during The Protectorate of Oliver Cromwell the word commonwealth was the most common term to call the new monarchless state, likewise, in Polish, the term was translated as rzeczpospolita, although the translation is now only used with respect to Poland. Presently, the term republic commonly means a system of government which derives its power from the rather than from another basis. After the classical period, during the Middle Ages, many cities developed again. The modern type of itself is different from any type of state found in the classical world. Nevertheless, there are a number of states of the era that are today still called republics

15.
Semi-presidential system
–
A semi-presidential system is a system of government in which a president exists alongside a prime minister and a cabinet, with the latter two being responsible to the legislature of a state. There are two subtypes of semi-presidentialism, premier-presidentialism and president-parliamentarism. Under the premier-presidential system, the minister and cabinet are exclusively accountable to parliament. The president chooses the prime minister and cabinet, but only the parliament may remove them from office with a vote of no confidence, the president does not have the right to dismiss the prime minister or the cabinet. However, in cases, the president can circumvent this limitation by exercising the discretionary power of dissolving the assembly. This subtype is used in Burkina Faso, France, Georgia, Lithuania, Madagascar, Mali, Mongolia, Niger, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Senegal, Sri Lanka and Ukraine. Under the president-parliamentary system, the minister and cabinet are dually accountable to the president. The president chooses the prime minister and the cabinet but must have the support of the parliament majority for his choice. In order to remove a prime minister or the cabinet from power. This form of semi-presidentialism is much closer to pure presidentialism and it is used in Armenia, Georgia between 2004 and 2013, Mozambique, Namibia, Russia, Taiwan and Ukraine between 1996 and 2005, and again from 2010 to 2014. It was used in Germany during the Weimarer Republik, as the regime between 1919 and 1933 is called unofficially. The powers that are divided between president and prime minister can vary greatly between countries and it is up to the president to decide, how much autonomy he leaves to his prime minister to act on his own. Semi-presidential systems may experience periods in which the President and the Prime Minister are from differing political parties. This is called cohabitation, a term originated in France when the situation first arose in the 1980s. In most cases, cohabitation results from a system in which the two executives are not elected at the time or for the same term. For example, in 1981, France elected both a Socialist president and legislature, which yielded a Socialist premier, but whereas the presidents term of office was for seven years, the National Assembly only served for five. When, in the 1986 legislative election, the French people elected a right-of-centre Assembly, however, in 2000, amendments to the French Constitution reduced the length of the French Presidents term from seven to five years. This has significantly lowered the chances of occurring, as parliamentary

16.
Theocracy
–
Theocracy is a form of government in which a deity is the source from which all authority derives. The Oxford English Dictionary has this definition,1, a system of government in which priests rule in the name of God or a god. The commonwealth of Israel from the time of Moses until the election of Saul as King, an ecclesiocracy is a situation where the religious leaders assume a leading role in the state, but do not claim that they are instruments of divine revelation. For example, the prince-bishops of the European Middle Ages, where the bishop was also the temporal ruler, religiously endorsed monarchies fall between theocracy and ecclesiocracy, according to the relative strengths of the religious and political organs. Most forms of theocracy are oligarchic in nature, involving rule of the many by the few, some of whom so anointed under claim of divine commission. In some religions, the ruler, usually a king, was regarded as the favorite of God who could not be questioned, sometimes even being the descendant of. Today, there is also a form of government where clerics have the power, taken literally or strictly, theocracy means rule by God or gods and refers primarily to an internal rule of the heart, especially in its biblical application. The common, generic use of the term, as defined above in terms of rule by a church or analogous religious leadership, in a pure theocracy, the civil leader is believed to have a personal connection with the civilizations religion or belief. For example, Moses led the Israelites, and Muhammad led the early Muslims, there is a fine line between the tendency of appointing religious characters to run the state and having a religious-based government. According to the Holy Books, Prophet Joseph was offered an essential governmental role just because he was trustworthy, wise and knowledgeable. As a result of the Prophet Josephs knowledge and also due to his ethical and genuine efforts during a critical economic situation, when religions have a holy book, it is used as a direct message from God. Law proclaimed by the ruler is also considered a divine revelation, as to the Prophet Muhammad ruling, The first thirteen of the Prophets twenty-three year career went on totally apolitical and non-violent. Yet, interestingly, the Prophet did not establish a theocracy in Medina, instead of a polity defined solely by Islam, he founded a territorial polity based on religious pluralism. This is evident in a document called the ’Charter of Medina’, according to the Quran, Prophets were not after power or material resources. ”While, in theocracy many aspects of the holy book are overshadowed by material powers. Due to be considered divine, the regime entitles itself to interpret verses to its own benefit and abuse them out of the context for its political aims. An ecclesiocracy, on the hand, is a situation where the religious leaders assume a leading role in the state. For example, the prince-bishops of the European Middle Ages, where the bishop was also the temporal ruler, religiously endorsed monarchies fall between these two poles, according to the relative strengths of the religious and political organs. Theocracy is distinguished from other, secular forms of government that have a religion, or are influenced by theological or moral concepts

17.
International relations
–
International relations is an academic and a public policy field, and so can be positive and normative, because it analyzes and formulates the foreign policy of a given State. As political activity, international relations dates from the time of the Greek historian Thucydides, in practice International Relations and International Affairs forms a separate academic program or field from Political Science, and the courses taught therein are highly interdisciplinary. The history of international relations based on sovereign states is often traced back to the Peace of Westphalia of 1648, prior to this the European medieval organization of political authority was based on a vaguely hierarchical religious order. Contrary to popular belief, Westphalia still embodied layered systems of sovereignty, the centuries of roughly 1500 to 1789 saw the rise of the independent, sovereign states, the institutionalization of diplomacy and armies. The French Revolution added to this the new idea that not princes or an oligarchy, such a state in which the nation is sovereign would thence be termed a nation-state. The term republic increasingly became its synonym, the same claim to sovereignty was made for both forms of nation-state. The particular European system supposing the sovereign equality of states was exported to the Americas, Africa, and Asia via colonialism, the contemporary international system was finally established through decolonization during the Cold War. While the nation-state system is considered modern, many states have not incorporated the system and are termed pre-modern, further, a handful of states have moved beyond insistence on full sovereignty, and can be considered post-modern. The ability of contemporary IR discourse to explain the relations of different types of states is disputed. What is explicitly recognized as international relations theory was not developed until after World War I, IR theory, however, has a long tradition of drawing on the work of other social sciences. The use of capitalizations of the I and R in international relations aims to distinguish the academic discipline of international relations from the phenomena of international relations. Similarly, liberalism draws upon the work of Kant and Rousseau, in the 20th century, in addition to contemporary theories of liberal internationalism, Marxism has been a foundation of international relations. International relations as a field of study began in Britain. IR emerged as an academic discipline in 1919 with the founding of the first IR professorship. Georgetown Universitys Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service is the oldest international relations faculty in the United States and this was rapidly followed by establishment of IR at universities in the US and in Geneva, Switzerland. The creation of the posts of Montague Burton Professor of International Relations at LSE, furthermore, the International History department at LSE developed a focus on the history of IR in the early modern, colonial and Cold War periods. The first university dedicated to the study of IR was the Graduate Institute of International Studies. The Committee on International Relations at the University of Chicago was the first to offer a graduate degree, in 2012, Ramon Llull University initiated the first International Relations degree in Barcelona, fully in English

18.
International relations theory
–
International relations theory is the study of international relations from a theoretical perspective. It attempts to provide a framework upon which international relations can be analyzed. The three most prominent theories are realism, liberalism and constructivism, many often conflicting ways of thinking exist in IR theory, including constructivism, institutionalism, Marxism, neo-Gramscianism, and others. However, two positivist schools of thought are most prevalent, realism and liberalism, constructivism, however, is increasingly becoming mainstream. The study of International relations as theory can be traced to E. H. Carrs The Twenty Years Crisis which was published in 1939 and to Hans Morgenthaus Politics Among Nations published in 1948. International relations as a discipline is believed to have emerged after the First World War with the establishment of a Chair of International Relations at the University of Wales, Aberystwyth. Early international relations scholarship in the years focused on the need for the balance of power system to be replaced with a system of collective security. These thinkers were later described as Idealists, the leading critique of this school of thinking was the realist analysis offered by Carr. However, a recent study by David Long and Brian Schmidt in 2005. They claim, that the history of the field can be traced back to late 19th Century imperialism and internationalism and their revisionist account claims that up until 1918, International Relations already existed in the form of colonial administration, race science and race development. Explanatory and constitutive approaches in international relations theory is a distinction made when classifying international relations theories, explanatory theories are ones which see the world as something external to theorize about it. A constitutive theory is one which believes that theories actually help construct the world, Realism or political realism has been the dominant theory of international relations since the conception of the discipline. The theory claims to rely upon an ancient tradition of thought which includes such as Thucydides, Machiavelli. Early realism can be characterized as a reaction against interwar idealist thinking, the outbreak of World War II was seen by realists as evidence of the deficiencies of idealist thinking. There are various strands of modern-day realist thinking, however, the main tenets of the theory have been identified as statism, survival, and self-help. Statism, Realists believe that states are the main actors in international politics. As such it is a theory of international relations. This contrasts with liberal international relations theories which accommodate roles for non-state actors, survival, Realists believe that the international system is governed by anarchy, meaning that there is no central authority

19.
Public administration
–
Public administration is the implementation of government policy and also an academic discipline that studies this implementation and prepares civil servants for working in the public service. As a field of inquiry with a diverse scope its fundamental goal, is to advance management and policies so that government can function. Public administrators are public servants working in departments and agencies. In the US, civil servants and academics such as Woodrow Wilson promoted American civil service reform in the 1880s, however, until the mid-20th century and the dissemination of the German sociologist Max Webers theory of bureaucracy there was not much interest in a theory of public administration. In 1947 Paul H. Appleby defined public administration as public leadership of public affairs directly responsible for executive action. In a democracy, it has to do with such leadership and executive action in terms that respect and contribute to the dignity, the worth, and the potentials of the citizen. One year later, Gordon Clapp, then Chairman of the Tennessee Valley Authority defined public administration as a public instrument whereby democratic society may be completely realized. This implies that it must relate itself to concepts of justice, liberty, and fuller economic opportunity for human beings and is concerned with people, with ideas. The key term product refers to items that are constructed or produced such as prisons, roads, laws, schools. As implementors, public managers engage these products and they participate in the doing and making of the living democracy. A living democracy is an environment that is changing, organic, imperfect, inconsistent, more recently scholars claim that public administration has no generally accepted definition, because the scope of the subject is so great and so debatable that it is easier to explain than define. Public administration is a field of study and an occupation, scholar Donald Kettl is among those who view public administration as a subfield within political science. The moral purpose of administration, implicit in its acceptance of its role, is the maximisation of the opportunities of the public to satisfy its wants. The North American Industry Classification System definition of the Public Administration sector states that public administration, dating back to Antiquity, Pharaohs, kings and emperors have required pages, treasurers, and tax collectors to administer the practical business of government. Prior to the 19th century, staffing of most public administrations was rife with nepotism, favoritism, and political patronage, Public administrators have long been the eyes and ears of rulers. In medieval times, the abilities to read and write, add, as the European Imperialist age progressed and the militarily powers extended their hold over other continents and people, the need for a sophisticated public administration grew. Far in advance of the rest of the world until almost the end of the eighteenth century, the eighteenth-century noble, King Frederick William I of Prussia, created professorates in Cameralism in an effort to train a new class of public administrators. The universities of Frankfurt an der Oder and University of Halle were Prussian institutions emphasizing economic and social disciplines, johann Heinrich Gottlob Justi was the most well-known professor of Cameralism

20.
Bureaucracy
–
Bureaucracy means both a body of non-elective government officials and an administrative policy-making group. Historically, a bureaucracy was a government administration managed by departments staffed with non-elected officials, today, bureaucracy is the administrative system governing any large institution. The public administration in many countries is an example of a bureaucracy, since being coined, the word bureaucracy has developed negative connotations. Bureaucracies have been criticized as being inefficient, convoluted, or too inflexible to individuals, the dehumanizing effects of excessive bureaucracy became a major theme in the work of German-language writer Franz Kafka and are central to his novels The Trial and The Castle. The elimination of bureaucracy is a key concept in modern managerial theory and has been an issue in some political campaigns. Others have noted the necessity of bureaucracies in modern life, the term bureaucracy is French in origin and combines the French word bureau – desk or office – with the Greek word κράτος kratos – rule or political power. It was coined in the century by the French economist Jacques Claude Marie Vincent de Gournay and was a satirical pejorative from the outset. Gournay never wrote the term down but was quoted at length in a letter from a contemporary. Here, too, the sense was pejorative, with Irish novelist Lady Morgan referring to the Bureaucratie, or office tyranny, by which Ireland has so long been governed. By the mid-19th century, the word was being used in a neutral sense. In this sense bureaucracy was seen as a form of management. In the1920s, the definition was expanded by the German sociologist Max Weber to include any system of administration conducted by trained professionals according to fixed rules, although the term bureaucracy was not coined until the mid 18th century, organized and consistent administrative systems are much older. Ancient Egypt also had a class of scribes that administered the civil service bureaucracy. The Roman Empire was administered by a hierarchy of regional proconsuls, the reforms of Diocletian doubled the number of administrative districts and led to a large-scale expansion in Roman bureaucracy. After the Empire split, the Byzantine Empire developed a complicated administrative hierarchy. In Ancient China, the Han dynasty established a complicated bureaucracy based on the teachings of Confucius, who emphasized the importance of ritual in family, relationships, with each subsequent Dynasty, the bureaucracy evolved. During the Song dynasty, the bureaucracy became meritocratic, following the Song reforms, competitive exams were held to determine who could hold which positions. The imperial examination system lasted until 1905, six years before the collapse of the Qing Dynasty, a modern form of bureaucracy evolved in the expanding Department of Excise in the United Kingdom, during the 18th century

21.
Public interest
–
Public interest, according to the Random House Dictionary, is 1. The welfare or well-being of the public, commonwealth. Appeal or relevance to the populace, a news story of public interest. This approach is ex ante, in the sense that the change is not evaluated after the fact and this approach follows the veil of ignorance approach, which was first proposed by John Harsanyi but popularized by John Rawls in his 1971 Theory of Justice. The Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales argues that applying a definition is likely to result in unintended consequences. Instead, each needs to be assessed based on criteria such as the relevant public, wants. The key to assessing any public interest decision is transparency of the decision-making process, “Public interest law” is a term that became widely adopted in the United States during and after the social turmoil of the 1960s. It built upon a tradition exemplified by Louis Brandeis, who before becoming a U. S. Supreme Court justice incorporated advocacy for the interests of the public into his legal practice. They defined themselves as public interest lawyers in order to themselves from the “corporate adjuncts” referred to by Brandeis. Public interest law does not describe a body of law or a legal field, instead of representing powerful economic interests, they chose to be advocates for otherwise underrepresented individuals. Consequently, a significant current in public interest lawyering has always emphasized the need to provide services to those living in poverty. Public interest has been considered as the core of democratic theories of government”, Public interest, convenience and necessity appeared for the first time in the Transportation Act of 1920 and also appeared in the Radio Act of 1927. After that, these three concepts became critical criteria for making policies and solving some related disputes. Cause lawyering Common good Condorcet paradox Convenience National interest Necessity Pareto optimality Radio Act of 1927 Telecommunications Act of 1996

22.
Legislature
–
A legislature is a deliberative assembly with the authority to make laws for a political entity such as a country or city. Legislatures form important parts of most governments, in the separation of model, they are often contrasted with the executive. Laws enacted by legislatures are known as legislation, legislatures observe and steer governing actions and usually have exclusive authority to amend the budget or budgets involved in the process. The members of a legislature are called legislators, each chamber of legislature consists of a number of legislators who use some form of parliamentary procedure to debate political issues and vote on proposed legislation. There must be a number of legislators present to carry out these activities. Some of the responsibilities of a legislature, such as giving first consideration to newly proposed legislation, are delegated to committees made up of small selections of the legislators. The members of a legislature usually represent different political parties, the members from each party generally meet as a caucus to organize their internal affairs, the internal organization of a legislature is also shaped by the informal norms that are shared by its members. Legislatures vary widely in the amount of power they wield, compared to other political players such as judiciaries, militaries. In 2009, political scientists M. Steven Fish and Matthew Kroenig constructed a Parliamentary Powers Index in an attempt to quantify the different degrees of power among national legislatures, such a system renders the legislature more powerful. Legislatures will sometime delegate their legislative power to administrative or executive agencies, legislatures are made up of individual members, known as legislators, who vote on proposed laws. For example, a legislature that has 100 seats has 100 members, by extension, an electoral district that elects a single legislator can also be described as a seat, as, for, example, in the phrases safe seat and marginal seat. In parliamentary systems of government, the executive is responsible to the legislature which may remove it with a vote of no confidence, names for national legislatures include parliament, congress, diet and assembly. A legislature which operates as a unit is unicameral, one divided into two chambers is bicameral, and one divided into three chambers is tricameral. In bicameral legislatures, one chamber is considered the upper house. In federations, the upper house typically represents the component states. This is a case with the legislature of the European Union. Tricameral legislatures are rare, the Massachusetts Governors Council still exists, tetracameral legislatures no longer exist, but they were previously used in Scandinavia. Legislatures vary widely in their size, among national legislatures, Chinas National Peoples Congress is the largest with 2987 members, while Vatican Citys Pontifical Commission is the smallest with 7

23.
Judiciary
–
The judiciary is the system of courts that interprets and applies the law in the name of the state. The judiciary also provides a mechanism for the resolution of disputes, in some nations, under doctrines of separation of powers, the judiciary generally does not make law or enforce law, but rather interprets law and applies it to the facts of each case. In other nations, the judiciary can make law, known as Common Law, by setting precedent for other judges to follow, the Judiciary is often tasked with ensuring equal justice under law. In many jurisdictions the judicial branch has the power to change laws through the process of judicial review, Judges constitute a critical force for interpretation and implementation of a constitution, thus de facto in common law countries creating the body of constitutional law. Budget of the judiciary in many transitional and developing countries is almost completely controlled by the executive, the latter undermines the separation of powers, as it creates a critical financial dependence of the judiciary. The proper national wealth distribution including the government spending on the judiciary is subject of the constitutional economics and it is important to distinguish between the two methods of corruption of the judiciary, the state, and the private. For instance, in France, the jurisprudence constante of the Court of Cassation or the Council of State is equivalent in practice with case law, in common law jurisdictions, courts interpret law, this includes constitutions, statutes, and regulations. They also make law based upon prior case law in areas where the legislature has not made law, for instance, the tort of negligence is not derived from statute law in most common law jurisdictions. The term common law refers to this kind of law, in civil law jurisdictions, courts interpret the law, but are prohibited from creating law, and thus do not issue rulings more general than the actual case to be judged. Jurisprudence plays a role to case law. State courts, which try 98% of litigation, may have different names and organization, trial courts may be called courts of common plea, appellate courts superior courts or commonwealth courts. The judicial system, whether state or federal, begins with a court of first instance, is appealed to an appellate court, and then ends at the court of last resort. In France, the authority on the interpretation of the law is the Council of State for administrative cases. In the Peoples Republic of China, the authority on the interpretation of the law is the National Peoples Congress. Other countries such as Argentina have mixed systems that include lower courts, appeals courts, a cassation court, in this system the Supreme Court is always the final authority, but criminal cases have four stages, one more than civil law does. On the court sits a total of nine justices and this number has been changed several times. Japans process for selecting judges is longer and more stringent than the process in the United States, assistant judges are appointed from those who have completed their training at the Legal Training and Research Institute located in Wako. Once appointed, assistant judges still may not qualify to sit alone until they have served for five years, Judges require ten years of experience in practical affairs, as a public prosecutor or practicing attorney

24.
Sovereignty
–
Sovereignty is understood in jurisprudence as the full right and power of a governing body to govern itself without any interference from outside sources or bodies. In political theory, sovereignty is a term designating supreme authority over some polity. It is a basic principle underlying the dominant Westphalian model of state foundation, derived from Latin through French souveraineté, its attainment and retention, in both Chinese and Western culture, has traditionally been associated with certain moral imperatives upon any claimant. The concept of sovereignty has been discussed throughout history, and is still actively debated and it has changed in its definition, concept, and application throughout, especially during the Age of Enlightenment. The current notion of state sovereignty contains four aspects consisting of territory, population, authority, Sovereignty is a hypothetical trade, in which two potentially conflicting sides, respecting de facto realities of power, exchange such recognitions as their least costly strategy. The Roman jurist Ulpian observed that, The imperium of the people is transferred to the Emperor, the Emperor is not bound by the law. Emperor is the law making and abiding force, Ulpian was expressing the idea that the Emperor exercised a rather absolute form of sovereignty, although he did not use the term expressly. Classical Ulpians statements were known in medieval Europe, but sovereignty was an important concept in medieval times, Medieval monarchs were not sovereign, at least not strongly so, because they were constrained by, and shared power with, their feudal aristocracy. Furthermore, both were strongly constrained by custom, Sovereignty existed during the Medieval Period as the de jure rights of nobility and royalty, and in the de facto capability of individuals to make their own choices in life. 1380–1400, the issue of sovereignty was addressed in Geoffrey Chaucers Middle English collection of Canterbury Tales. The story revolves around the knight Sir Gawain granting to Dame Ragnell, his new bride, what is purported to be wanted most by women and we desire most from men, From men both lund and poor, To have sovereignty without lies. For where we have sovereignty, all is ours, Though a knight be ever so fierce and it is our desire to have master Over such a sir. Jean Bodin, partly in reaction to the chaos of the French wars of religion, in his 1576 treatise Les Six Livres de la République Bodin argued that it is inherent in the nature of the state that the sovereign must have both great and perpetual authority. Bodin rejected the notion of transference of sovereignty from people to the ruler, however, although he is often connected with absolutism, Bodin held some moderate opinions on how government should in practice be carried out. Thus, Bodin’s sovereign was restricted by the law of the state. Bodin believed that “the most divine, most excellent, and the form most proper to royalty is governed partly aristocratically and partly democratically”. With his doctrine that sovereignty is conferred by law, Bodin predefined the scope of the divine right of kings. During the Age of Enlightenment, the idea of sovereignty gained both legal and moral force as the main Western description of the meaning and power of a State

Voting is a method for a group, such as, a meeting or an electorate to make a decision or express an opinion, usually …

In Switzerland, without need to register, every citizen receives at home the ballot papers and information brochure for each voting (and can send it by post). Switzerland has a direct democracy system and votes are organised about four times a year.

A revolutionary republican hand-written bill from the Stockholm riots during the Revolutions of 1848, reading: "Dethrone Oscar he is not fit to be a king – rather the Republic! Reform! Down with the Royal house – long live Aftonbladet! Death to the king – Republic! Republic! – the people! Brunkeberg this evening." The writer's identity is unknown.